Smoooooot Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 Though I think that Jason Campbell might not do much better than Brunell right now...I thought that this might be interesting. Looking at every other starting QB in the league, which ones would you take Mr. Brunell over? I was hard pressed to find more than a few: Kitna, whoever is playing for the Raiders (Brooks, Collins, the other guy), Simms or the rookie the Bucs had playing today?, Alex Smith? Vince Young? (I'm just talking about this year), Leinart?...I can't think of anyone else. Can anyone help me out here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 I think it's time we see what we have in our young QB. I'm not saying the season is lost but lets be honest, this isn't a Super Bowl contender... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buck812 Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 Though I think that Jason Campbell might not do much better than Brunell right now...I thought that this might be interesting. Looking at every other starting QB in the league, which ones would you take Mr. Brunell over? I was hard pressed to find more than a few: Kitna, whoever is playing for the Raiders (Brooks, Collins, the other guy), Simms or the rookie the Bucs had playing today?, Alex Smith? Vince Young? (I'm just talking about this year), Leinart?...I can't think of anyone else. Can anyone help me out here? Not sure I would take him over most of those.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC3 Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 Personally, I'd go with Trent Green if he were a starting QB. Damon Huard may know the Saunders offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
praise_gibbs Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 Not sure I would take him over most of those.... Same here. ESPECIALLY Aaron Brooks!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbw33 Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 At least Brunnell does not make big time mistakes for the most part....imagine if he did what bledsoe or big ben does. Brunnell gets killed for being cautious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoooooot Posted October 9, 2006 Author Share Posted October 9, 2006 At least Brunnell does not make big time mistakes for the most part....imagine if he did what bledsoe or big ben does. Brunnell gets killed for being cautious. Imagine if he did what Big Ben does? I gladly would imagine Ben playing for the Skins thank you very much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbw33 Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 you miss the past 3 weeks? Steelers about to be 1-3...picks all around..go ahead and take him. Last year was the team not him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 Maybe we should try Randel-El at QB??!?! Heck, the Steelers tried it with Slash and they got to a conference championship with him in his first season as a starter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskingluvr Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 Doesn't matter. We have Mark, and we need to work on his attitude and effort level obviously. In some ways I am thankful for Mark, but I don't think he is too thankful to be here from what I can see. His effort shows a 'take it for granted' attitude I don't like. So let's whip him into shape. I am selling whips for $435/ each. I think Gibbs needs to have a little 'Come in the office and close the door please" talk with saunders, the new kid from buffalo, the line coaches, the lines, and brunell tomorrow morning first thing. :whippin: :stick: :whippin: :whip: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuru10 Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 Enough Brunnel bashing. The last two weeks everyone was loving him and now we lose and he's the blame. Today was on our defense, the Giants maintained the ball for most of the second half, ran 20 more plays than us and almost every time we got the ball we had a long field. We had them pinned at the 1 and they drove the ball for a field goal. If we went 3 and out we had the ball at Mid-Field. The defense needs to step up and we need to stop blaming Brunnel unless he becomes our nickel corner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catts15 Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 So because big ben's not afraid to let his team make plays he gets smashed??? I think oldnell is so afraid of losig his job he'd take 50 sacks over 1 Int... We have a top 5 recieving core, LET THEM MAKE PLAYS.... 700 Pages?? Why do "I" know whats coming at home???????:dallasuck :eaglesuck :gaintsuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Washington Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 Maybe we should try Randel-El at QB??!?!Heck, the Steelers tried it with Slash and they got to a conference championship with him in his first season as a starter :laugh: brunell is the best qb we got. whatever that means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sanders 83 Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 Watching all these other young QB's in the league, it's hard not to want to see what Campbell can do. The only time Brunell looks halfway decent, is when the other 10 people around him are playing perfect football. We need a quarterback who can create when the play breaks down, and Brunell can no longer do it. Tennesse is a perfect game for Campbell to get his first start. Too bad it won't happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 :laugh: brunell is the best qb we got. whatever that means. The word "quarterback" is just a word. It's just a label. We don't need to be restricted by it. I'm sure in Saunders' 700-page playbook he has an entire chapter devoted to plays without a quarterback and 7 receivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuru10 Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 The only time Brunell looks halfway decent, is when the other 10 people around him are playing perfect football. We need a quarterback who can create when the play breaks down, and Brunell can no longer do it. The problem is there are only about three QB's in the league who can do that as well, P. Manning, McNabb and Brady. Unless we're getting one of those guys, which we aren't, we as well as every other team in the league needs a total effort on offense to get it done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskingluvr Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 The blame the d for the o not scoring logic is ridiculous. With the d on the field that long, the o should be well rested, the coordinators prepared, and ready to rock. However, when the d only gets 30 seconds to rest before being back on the field thx to our 3 and outs, they get tired and look worse. So in actuality, despite our O not keeping the ball or a drive going long enough in the last 3 quarters to give our d a rest and God forbid score, we held the giants to only 19 points. 3.75 below their average. Yet our O, who got the ball as many times as the giants did today (someone forgets that when they score we get the ball back every time, and also when they punt???), failed to produce but one drive. That is a serious concern. Gibbs, "SAUNDERS, BRUNELL, IN MY office NOW!! And shut the door behind you..." :redpunch: :2drunks: :poke: :whippin: :whippin: :whip: :stick: :stick: :whip: Now get OUT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoooooot Posted October 9, 2006 Author Share Posted October 9, 2006 The problem is there are only about three QB's in the league who can do that as well, P. Manning, McNabb and Brady. Unless we're getting one of those guys, which we aren't, we as well as every other team in the league needs a total effort on offense to get it done. Well, how about at least a QB that is willing to stand in the pocket and throw the deep ball while knowing he is going to get clobbered. That's what Eli did to us today on at least two of those bombs he threw. Brunell would have taken the sack or thrown the ball away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tnjazz Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 Today was on our defense......The defense needs to step up and we need to stop blaming Brunnel unless he becomes our nickel corner. It's about time someone said this. I don't think the offense is that big of a problem. The defense just flat out sucks though. In all of the games so far teams have pretty much moved down the field at will. Mr. Williams needs to light a fire under the starting 11 (and the rest of them too). My guess is once the defense can actually stop someone on 3rd and 16, the offense will take a cue from them and take it up a notch as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuru10 Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 Well, how about at least a QB that is willing to stand in the pocket and throw the deep ball while knowing he is going to get clobbered. That's what Eli did to us today on at least two of those bombs he threw. Brunell would have taken the sack or thrown the ball away. When guys are open, Brunell stands in the pocket and hits the open receiver, like he did in the past two weeks. When a team is getting pressure with 4 or 5 guys like the Giants did today, we aren't going to hit the deep ball. The past two weeks we hit a lot of underneath stuff and opened up the field, today we didn't do that b/c we fell down early. That's not Brunnel as much as it is the whole offense and our defense for not giving us a short field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskingluvr Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 The blame the d for the o not scoring logic is ridiculous. With the d on the field that long, the o should be well rested, the coordinators prepared, and ready to rock. However, when the d only gets 30 seconds to rest before being back on the field thx to our 3 and outs, they get tired and look worse. So in actuality, despite our O not keeping the ball or a drive going long enough in the last 3 quarters to give our d a rest and God forbid score, we held the giants to only 19 points. 3.75 below their average. Yet our O, who got the ball as many times as the giants did today (someone forgets that when they score we get the ball back every time, and also when they punt???), failed to produce but one drive. That is a serious concern.Gibbs, "SAUNDERS, BRUNELL, IN MY office NOW!! And shut the door behind you..." :redpunch: :2drunks: :poke: :whippin: :whippin: :whip: :stick: :stick: :whip: Now get OUT! That exactly right, some of these guys r on crack and don't realize the defense cannot make the offense score more or less or hold onto the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsciambi Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 This one is definitely not Brunell's fault. If anything, horrible offensive line play is to blame. That's probably the worst they've played this season. Add to that an all around crappy performance by the defense, and we get a game like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REDSKINZ-RIDEORDIE Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 At least Brunnell does not make big time mistakes for the most part....imagine if he did what bledsoe or big ben does. Brunnell gets killed for being cautious. Thatz true, but at the end of the day, our defence aint good enough to be having 115 yard total passing yard games. We cant win with Brunell having these type passing performances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smalczak Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 No, its not Brunell's fault per se. The man doesnt DO anything that can possible be a mistake. But its his fault in the sense that he is so limited in what he CAN do that we are greatly simplifying the job of the opposing defense. Take away the outside, guard against the run. They can largely leave the middle of the field open because Brunell is just as likely to overthrow and get an INT as a reception in the middle. Brunell is not going to come in and win many games for us. Unfortunately if our defense is also going to suspect, then we are screwed. We need a QB who CAN come in and potentially win the game for us, not 'manage' it. I hate that we are paying so much money for a 'game manager'. Looking at all these young QBs coming and in making a difference, then if Brunell is our best chance of winning, I think the Skins severely screwed the pooch on their other selections of QB (drafting an apparent project player so high and bringing in a relatively untried and uninspiring backup just because he 'knows the offense'). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buck812 Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 Maybe we should try Randel-El at QB??!?!Heck, the Steelers tried it with Slash and they got to a conference championship with him in his first season as a starter Anything is better then what we are doing... :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.